MacIas

The defendants in this action have filed a motion to dismiss it. The federal defendant, Robert H. Finch, Secretary of the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, raises both jurisdictional and substantive contentions. The other defendants — John C. Montgomery, Director of the California Department of Social Welfare, and Frederick B. Gillette, Director of the Santa Clara County Public Welfare Department- — contend that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Rule 12, F.R.Civ.P.) We discuss the various procedural and substantive contentions separately.

1. Need for a Three-Judge Court.

We first consider whether a three-judge court is necessary in this case. The plaintiffs attack the constitutionality of two congressional statutes ( 42 U.S.C. §§ 606 (a) and 607) and of a state statute, § 11250(b) of the California Welfare & Institutions Code. They now contend, however, that no statute — either federal or state — need be declared unconstitutional.

Instead, the plaintiffs assert that the action can be read as challenging federal regulations defining the requirements for state plans authorizing aid to dependent children of unemployed…